Karl Vaters: 14 Observations About the State of Christian Denominations Today

April 15, 2019

There are only two forms of the church that ultimately matter.

The universal church and the local church.

Everything else is an add-on. Including buildings, furniture, styles of music, types of preaching, curriculum, and the subject of today’s article, denominations.

I’m not against denominations. I’ve been in one my whole life and it’s been a blessing to our church and to me personally.

But, like church buildings, pews, choir robes or skinny jeans on the worship leader, it’s a temporary condition that has a limited life-span.

As I’ve traveled around the world over the last several years, I’ve ministered in churches of almost every denomination and non-denomination. By doing so, I’ve learned a lot about the state of denominations today.

Here are 14 of my observations:

1. We are in a post-denominational culture.

It’s not coming. It’s here.

Like hymnbooks and pews bolted to the floor, there are still a lot of denominations around, but they’re becoming less common, especially among younger, newer churches.

Also like the changes from pews and hymnbooks to portable seats and video screens, this is not all good or all bad.

Whether we like it or not, the Baby Boomers are likely to be the last generation that will care, commit to, or fight over denominational labels. (More on that in point 12.)

2. Denominations are still extremely helpful, especially for small churches.

Big churches have the size, the money and the infrastructure to operate independently far more easily than small churches.

Plus, as I’ve pointed out in Small Church Essentials, bigger churches have a lot more in common with each other than small churches do, so they have a greater ability to lean on each other through conferences and informal networks.

But many small churches still depend on denominational support. A lot of them wouldn’t be able to survive without funds, programs, curriculum and other help from their denominational structure. So, even as most denominations downsize, there’s still a place for their structures, fellowship, accountability and financial support for a lot of struggling smaller congregations.

3. Non-denominational churches are starting to discover some of the problems of independence.

Big churches may not be as dependent on denominational support as their small church counterparts, but flying alone has hazards – as many of them are coming to realize – especially when there’s a scandal, a tragedy or a pastoral transition.

Because of this, several uber-large churches are starting quasi-denominations of their own. They may call themselves multi-site, associations or partnerships, but most of them are nascent denominations under a different name.

This isn’t wrong, or even dishonest. Most of them are organizing and will operate their associations very differently than the way denominations have been run, so it’s appropriate that they call them by a different name.

4. The stronger the denominational tie they have, the more likely the church is to be weak.

I want to say this carefully and lovingly. But I have to say it because I see it a lot.

There are a lot of great, healthy, effective churches with strong denominational ties. Some of them are even supporting their denomination more than the denomination has the ability to support them. But when a congregation’s identity is extremely closely tied to their denominational affiliation, that congregation is more likely to be weak than strong.

It’s very hard to find vibrant, healthy, effective churches that make statements like “we do it this way because we’re (insert denomination here)”. When a church’s denominational statements are more evident than their mission statement, they will draw almost no one who isn’t already in on the language, the traditions and the history.

If your church has a strong denominational relationship, keep it. But be careful about making your denomination your identity.

Mission must come first.

5. The denomination can support the church’s vision, but it shouldn’t set their vision.

Churches that take their entire lead from their denomination about what programs to run, what their theme for the year will be and so on, tend to be less healthy and effective.

When churches take their lead from where God is guiding them for their congregation and community, they tend to be more effective. The denominational program can support that vision, but should not be relied upon to give them their vision.

6. There is more variety among churches within a denomination than there used to be.

A generation ago, if you were familiar with a denomination, you could go to almost any church within that group and have a similar experience. No matter the size of the church, the region of the country, urban, suburban or rural, there were more similarities than differences among churches within the denomination.

Not any more.

Today you can go to different churches of the same denomination in the same town and have significantly different experiences. Not theologically, in most cases, but operationally. You’ll sing different songs, in different styles, with different programs for youth and kids, and more.

Common ground is more likely to be found among churches of the same size, or in similar types of towns, than across a denomination.

7. Denominations that are thriving are networking with their churches, not dictating to them.

If you take a look at any of the recent survey results about church growth and health denominationally, it’s almost universally the case that strong, top-down hierarchical denominations are struggling or declining, while those that offer support and networking with fewer hierarchical structures are more likely to be maintaining or growing.

A hierarchical denominational structure used to be perceived of as a sign of strength, confidence and solidity. Today, it’s considered restrictive, patriarchal and out of touch.